Craig Galik of Duquesne is not pleased.  Apparently, when he tunes in to the Ellen DeGeneres show, he doesn't expect to see any lesbian claptrap. Imagine his horror when Ellen spoke about her plans to marry partner, Portia De Rossi.  On television.  In front of viewers.  Gay stuff. 

Either Craig is the only person on earth who doesn't know that Ellen is a lesbian or he is just an idiot.  Actually, I'm pretty sure its the latter based on these statements:

Isn't it funny that we can talk openly about gay affairs on TV, but we cannot freely talk about Jesus.

Is this what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wanted freedom for all?

This is exactly the narrow-minded thinking that is so seductive to people lacking the capacity for original thought.  Craig postulates that there is more discussion of gay issues than Jesus-flavored religious issues on television.  That's simply preposterous.  You can't turn on a news station without smacking into some religious advisor or another commenting on the latest political issue.  We can't have a discussion on anything -- from access to healthcare to hemlines -- without contemplating what Jesus would do about it.  Craig also seems to forget that entire stations devoted to Jesus flavored religions dominated the airwaves long before LOGO came churning along.  It has been a long, long time since it wasn't cool to talk about Jesus on television.  Exactly one day longer than there has actually been television. 

What Craig is trying to do is pit any discussion of gay issues as a suppression of his religious liberties.  He does it poorly and with a distinct lack of poetry, but I'm sure he got a few amens out of the PG readers.  It is just amazing that Christians can somehow redefine themselves as a persecuted minority on one hand and yet force all three Presidential candidates to prove their Jesus-love in order to win the nomination.  Amazing.

To answer Craig's question about the Founding Father's wanting us to talk about gay issues as freely as religious issues, I say a resounding YES.  Freedom to exchange ideas was a big Founding Father priority, not the content of said ideas.  See the difference, Craig?  They wanted a society where you get to be a small-minded bigot and I get to love a woman without impinging on each others liberties. 

If you don't want to hear about the personal life of a lesbian, stop watching a television show named after and starring a lesbian.  There's nothing radical about that. 

In the most recent GLCC newsletter, the organization announced that Celebrate the Night has become an official committee of the organization.  Celebrate the Night is a variety show that benefits the GLCC.

As you may recall, CTN generated a firestorm last year by refusing to audition a transwoman and pronouncing that she was not woman enough to meet their criteria.  At that point, the CTN website described the event as celebrating all women.

They've since updated it to state:

For the purpose of this event, if a person is legally recognized as
a woman or living full-time as a woman, she is a woman.

No such requirement that to be a lesbian, you must be legally recognized or living full-time as a lesbian.  Which is good since there are many, many women who participate in CTN that are not 100% out of the closet and I would hate for them to feel excluded just because they aren't lesbian enough.

Well, at least if the GLCC is going to formally associate itself with an organization that openly discriminates against transwomen,things are a little more out in the open.  The GLCC has historically been a little weak on transinclusion and I don't really think this is going to come as a shock to anyone.  The truth is that Pittsburghers who are L, G, B and Q really have a long way to go when it comes to lifting up and including our trans brothers and sisters.

For a complete herstory on this situation, click here.

Hey everybody!  Something involving a c-file got all screwed up and our blog has been down for a few days.  However, thanks to my trusty bloghost Geoff at Radio Left, things are shipshape again.

Today's Post-Gazette included an AP story on the current gay storyline on soap opera, As The World Turns, featuring a young gay male couple, Luke and Noah.  Luke is the son of two of the most prominent families in Oakdale, Illinois - the Snyders and the Walshes.  Noah is new to town, but has already distinguished himself with a homicidal military father and a long-lost mother-turned-madam.  Said mother was killed by the homicidal father.  Said father also tried to kill Luke, who ended up paralyzed in the process.  Fast forward a few months, Luke is walking fine and enjoying mucho macho hugs with his lover boy. 

What he isn't enjoying is any on-air kissin'.  Fans aren't pleased and suspect that company bigwigs at Proctor and Gamble are avoiding the face to face time to appease their homobigot viewers.  It is an interesting twist for a soap that has developed the most realistic and sensitive gay character in daytime history.  It has been infused with soap dramatics, but Luke's coming out was handled really quite well. 

[PG Spokeswoman] Tharrington laughed when asked about any behind-the-scenes debates over showing intimacy between the two men. "You wouldn't even believe," she said.

Producers are committed to telling the story of the romance, she said, adding she hoped the audience would recognize what "As the World Turns" is showing, instead of just what it isn't.

"We feel like we're doing so much right here," she said. "We're telling a story that no one else is doing. We're telling a story that has really engaged our audience."

Well, that's just bullshit. You want credit for pandering to perceived homophobia(apparently, no one is formally organizing the nuts)????  Sure the story is good, but neutering two perfectly healthy young men for the sake of being "unoffensive" is pretty darn well, offensive.  As for a story noone else is telling, that's not quite true.  All My Children's Bianca had a multi-year lesbian story, including a love affair with a transwoman.  It was typically dramatic and had its flaws, but it certainly told a new story.

People aren't clamoring for full frontal nudity and sex scenes, after all.  They just want you not to pan to the mistletoe during the kiss.  P&G is just being silly. 

In this week's City Paper, WTAE defends their coverage of a story involving the river rescue of a woman who happened to be trans.  They, along with just about every other local media outlet, were taken to task by local activists and allies for making the gender identity of the individual being rescued the story in lieu of the rescue itself.   In WTAE's case:

Over at WTAE, Janelle Hall reported: "The waters of the Allegheny started to rise and trapped that person. Ninety minutes into the rescue, paramedics pulled a 27-year-old transgender woman to safety."

Setting aside how incredibly stilted that sounds, I fail to see why the fact that Rebecca Hare was a transwoman had any bearing on her rescue.

Here's how WTAE's Roberta Petterson responds.

We came up with a plan aimed specifically at not sensationalizing the story and we executed that plan. In hindsight, we could have done some things differently, like edit some of the soundbites with rescuers, but we felt they helped tell a more complete story. Overall, our primary concern was finding a way to tell the story without focusing on Hare's "trans-ness," to use a quote from the University of Pittsburgh professor cited in your story.

Petterson fails to explain how the fact that Rebecca is a transwoman tells a complete story.  I don't believe WTAE contextualized her plight as a result of her identity as a transwoman.  In fact, Petterson clearly states that they didn't even interview Rebecca.  I haven't noted any follow up investigations on the plight of transwomen and transmen who are homeless in Pittsburgh.  What complete story did they tell? 

Each evening, the local news stations report on rescues and I have yet to see anyone identified as a "27 year old heterosexual, biological female" unless it has any direct relevance to the story.  Believe me.  I would notice any aberration from the "business as usual" coverage that presumes every yinzer and yinzerette in da burgh is straight as an arrow until it become sensational to drag out the stereotypical homo interviewees, ie. wealthy white gay men.

I like Roberta, but I still think WTAE dropped the ball on this story.  If they had simply reported on a story about a woman trapped in rising rivers, that would be fine.  The media created the story within the story. It doesn't matter how much effort you put into the decision -- Hall's report was flawed.  Rather than get defensive, it would behoove them to reach out to local advocates and experts to make sure it doesn't happen again.  Reach out to Persad and the GLCC and, yes, to the University of Pittsburgh professor quoted in the story (who happens to be a nationally renowned transadvocate). 

Hopefully, WTAE and other local media outlets will more forward as we gear up for PrideFest and focus on providing some LGBT-positive coverage for the planned festivities.  I know the temptation to highlight the stereotypes will be there, but surely a portion of the coverage could show some transpositive images as well.  Here's hoping.